COMPARISON OF BRYAN AND CLEVELAND
It was upon the territory which now comprises the States of Kansas and
Nebraska that the preliminary battles in the interest of freedom were
successfully fought. This is especially true of that part of the
territory which now comprises the State of Kansas. But not only for that
reason has that State occupied a prominent place before the public;
other events of national importance have had their birth there. It was
Kansas that furnished one of the Republican United State Senators who
voted against the conviction, of Andrew Johnson,--who had been impeached
by the House of Representatives for high crimes and misdemeanors in
office,--and thus secured the President's acquittal. That State also
furnished one of the most remarkable men that ever occupied a seat in
the United States Senate, John J. Ingalls.
I distinctly remember him as an able and brilliant young Senator
when,--in 1875, under the leadership of Senator George F. Edmunds, of
Vermont,--he took a prominent part in the successful fight that was made
in that body to secure the passage of the Sumner Civil Rights Bill. It
was this fight that demonstrated his fitness for the position he
subsequently occupied as one of the distinguished leaders on the
Republican side of the Senate. He was a natural born orator, having a
wonderful command of the English language; and, while he was somewhat
superficial and not always logical, he never failed to be interesting,
though he was seldom instructive. For severe satire and irony he had few
equals and no superiors. It was on this account that no Senator was
anxious to get into a controversy with him. But for two unfortunate
events in the career of John J. Ingalls he would have filled a much more
important position in the history of his country than it is now possible
for the impartial historian to give him.
Kansas, unfortunately, proved to be a fertile field for the growth and
development of that ephemeral organization known as the Populist
party,--a party that had secured a majority in the Legislature that was
to elect the successor to Mr. Ingalls. The Senator evidently had great
confidence in his own oratorical ability. He appeared to have conceived
the idea that it was possible for him to make a speech on the floor of
the Senate that would insure his reëlection even by a Populist
Legislature. In this,--as he soon found out, to his bitter
disappointment,--he was mistaken. He no doubt came to the same
conclusion that many of his friends and admirers had already come to,
that in bidding for the support of the Populists of his State he had
made the mistake of his life. The impression he made upon the public
mind was that he was devoid of principle, and that he was willing to
sacrifice his own party upon the altar of his ambition.
But it was neither known nor suspected that he contemplated making a bid
for the support of the Populist members of the Legislature until he
delivered his speech. When, therefore, it was announced that Senator
Ingalls would address the Senate on a certain day, he was greeted, as on
previous occasions, with a large audience. But this was the first time
that his hearers had been sadly disappointed. This was due more to what
was said than how it was said. Then it was plain to those who heard him
that his heart was not in what he was saying; hence the speech was
devoid of that fiery eloquence which on previous occasions had charmed
and electrified his hearers. But, after that speech, when one of his
auditors would ask another what he thought of it, the reply invariably
was a groan of disappointment. When the immense crowd dispersed at the
conclusion of the speech instead of smiling faces and pleasing
countenances as on previous occasions, one could not help noticing
marked evidences of disappointment in every face. The impression that
had been made was, that it was an appeal to the Populist members of the
Legislature of his State to return him to the Senate, in exchange for
which he was willing to turn his back upon the party which he was then
serving. It was almost equivalent to an open declaration of his
willingness to identify himself with the Populists, and champion their
cause if they would reelect him to the seat he then occupied. From the
effects of that fatal blunder the Senator never recovered.
Another thing that lessened the distinguished orator and Senator in the
estimation of the public was his radically changed attitude upon
questions affecting the political, social and industrial status of the
colored Americans. From a brilliant and eloquent champion and defender
of their civil and political rights he became one of their most severe
critics. From his latest utterances upon that subject it was clear to
those who heard what he said that the colored Americans merited nothing
that had been said and done in their behalf, but nearly everything that
had been said and done against them. Why there had been such a radical
change in his attitude upon that subject, has been an inexplicable
mystery. The only explanation that I have heard from the lips of some of
his former friends and admirers was that it was in the nature of an
experiment,--the expectation being that it would give him a sensational
fame throughout the country, which could be utilized to his financial
advantage upon his retirement to private life. This explanation would
have been rejected without serious consideration, but for the fact that
some others have pursued the same course for the same reason, and their
hopes have been, in a large measure, realized. In his bid for the
support of the Populist members of the Legislature of his State the
Senator had established the fact that he did not have very strong
convictions upon any subject, and that those he had could be easily
changed to suit the times and the occasion.
Nebraska, though not very strong politically, is one of the most
important States in the West. It has sent a number of men to the front
who have made an impression upon the public mind. For many years no
State in the Union was more reliably Republican than Nebraska. A large
majority of its voters, I am sure, are not now in harmony with the
Democratic party,--nor have they ever been so,--but it is true, at the
same time, that thousands of those who for many years acted with the
Republican party, and voted for its candidates, have become alienated,
thus making Republican success at any election in the State close and
doubtful, and that, too, regardless of the merits of opposing candidates
or the platform declarations of opposing parties.
For this remarkable change there must be a good and sufficient reason.
The State in its early history was sparsely populated, and stood very
much in need of railroads for the development of its resources. In
those days, railroads were very popular, and the people were in a mood
to offer liberal inducements to those who would raise the means to
furnish them with the necessary transportation facilities.
For the same reason the Federal Government made valuable concessions in
the interest of railroad construction in the Western States. Since the
railroads, thus aided, were in a large measure the creatures of the
State and Nation they thereby acquired an interest in the administration
of the National and State Governments,--especially those of the
State,--that they otherwise would not have had.
The construction of the roads went on at such a rapid rate that they
soon acquired such a power and influence in the administration of the
State Government that the people looked upon it as being dangerous to
their liberties. In fact it was claimed,--a claim, no doubt, largely
supported by the facts,--that the State Government was actually
dominated by railroad influence. No one, it was said, could be elected
or appointed to an important office who was not acceptable to the
railroad interests. This state of affairs produced a revulsion among the
common people; thousands of whom decided that they would vote against
the Republican party, which was then,--as it had been for many
years,--in control of the State Government because of its having
allowed such a state of affairs to be brought about.
Edward Rosewater, editor and proprietor of the Omaha _Bee_, the most
influential Republican paper in the State, took sides against the
railroad interests. The result was that Nebraska, for the first time,
elected a Democratic governor.
But many of the Republicans who acted with the Democrats on that
occasion could not see their way clear to remain in that party, though
some of them were not willing to return to the ranks of the Republicans.
So they decided to cast their lot with the Populist party, which in the
meantime had made its appearance upon the field of political activity.
While the Democratic party remained the minority party in the State, it
was seldom that the Republicans could poll more votes than the Democrats
and Populists combined, and since, under the then leadership of the
Democratic party in the State, that party and the Populist stood
practically for the same things, it was not difficult to bring about
fusion of the two parties against the Republicans. This gave the
Fusionists control of the State Government for a number of years.
In the meantime a brilliant, eloquent and talented young man had come
upon the stage of political activity. This man was William J. Bryan. His
first entry into public life was his election to Congress as a Democrat
from a Republican district. While a member of the House he made a
speech on the tariff question which gave him national fame. As a speaker
William Jennings Bryan has always been plausible and captivating. He can
clothe his thoughts in such beautiful and eloquent language that he
seldom fails to make a favorable impression upon those who hear him. It
was this wonderful faculty that secured him his first nomination for the
Presidency. His name was hardly thought of in connection with the
nomination by that convention. In fact his right to a seat as a member
of the convention was disputed and contested. But, after he had
delivered his cross of gold and crown of thorns speech before that body,
he carried the Convention by storm. His nomination was then a foregone
conclusion.
It was under the leadership and chiefly through the influence of Mr.
Bryan that the fusion between the Democrats and the Populists of his
State was brought about. But for his advocacy of Free Silver and his
affiliation with the Populists, he might have reached the goal of his
ambition. The result of the election showed that while he commanded and
received the support of not less than eighty per cent of his own party,
the remaining twenty per cent proved to be strong enough to insure his
defeat. In fact the business interests of the country were almost solid
against him; and it is safe to say that no man can ever hope to become
President of the United States who cannot at least divide the
substantial and solid business interests. The business men were
apprehensive that the election of Mr. Bryan would bring about financial
and commercial disaster, hence they, almost regardless of previous party
affiliations, practically united in an effort to defeat him.
The State of Nebraska, therefore, will always occupy a prominent place
in the history of the country, because,--though young, small, and
politically weak,--it has produced the most remarkable man of whom the
Democratic party can boast. It has also produced a number of very able
men on the Republican side, such men, for instance, as C.F. Manderson,
and John M. Thurston,--who both served the State in the United States
Senate, and made brilliant records. But Mr. Bryan had an advantage over
these two when he stood before a popular audience in Nebraska, because
they had been identified with the railroad interests, while he had not.
That Mr. Bryan is a strong man and has a wonderful hold upon his party
is shown by the fact that he has been three times the party candidate
for the Presidency. While it may be true that he can never be elected to
the Presidency, it is no doubt equally true that while he lives no other
Democrat can become President who is not acceptable to him and to his
friends.
In one respect at least, Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Bryan were very much
alike. As already stated, Mr. Bryan is a Democrat. The same was true of
Mr. Cleveland; and yet they were as radically different as it is
possible for two men to be. They were not only different in temperament
and disposition, but also in their views and convictions upon public
questions,--at least, so far as the public is informed,--with the
possible exception of the tariff. There was another question that came
to the front after the Spanish American war,--the question of
"Imperialism,"--upon which they may have been in accord; but this is not
positively known to be a fact. Indeed, the tariff is such a complicated
subject that they may not have been in perfect accord even on that. Mr.
Cleveland was elected President in 1892 upon a platform pledged to a
tariff for revenue only. The Democrats had a majority in both Houses of
Congress; but when that majority passed a tariff bill, it fell so far
short of Mr. Cleveland's idea of a tariff for revenue only that he not
only denounced it in strong language, but refused to sign it. Whether or
not Mr. Bryan was with the President or with the Democratic majority in
Congress in that fight is not known; but, judging from his previous
public utterances upon the subject, it is to be presumed that he was in
accord with the President.
It is claimed by the friends and admirers of both Mr. Cleveland and Mr.
Bryan that each could be truly called a Jeffersonian Democrat; which
means a strong advocate and defender of what is called States Rights, a
doctrine on which is based one of the principal differences between the
Republican and Democratic parties. Yet President Cleveland did not
hesitate to use the military force of the government to suppress
domestic violence within the boundaries of a State, and that too against
the protest of the Governor of the State, for the alleged reason that
such action was necessary to prevent the interruption of the carrying of
the United States mail. Mr. Bryan's views upon the same subject appear
to be sufficiently elastic to justify the National Government, in his
opinion, in becoming the owner and operator of the principal railroads
of the country. His views along those lines are so far in advance of
those of his party that he was obliged, for reasons of political
expediency and party exigency, to hold them in abeyance during the
Presidential campaign of 1908. Jeffersonian democracy, therefore, seems
now to be nothing more than a meaningless form of expression.